Comments on: Irish legislator embroiled in controversy over comments about homosexuality

By: Amy

Amy — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 18:26:26 +0000

I find it offensive that you call iris robinson the “first lady of ireland”
the fact she has nothing to do with Ireland
she is from Northern ireland a completely different country
i know maybe you didnt mean it but she has nothing to do with ireland

By: Jayhuck

Jayhuck — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 04:58:33 +0000

Timothy – LOL! 🙂

By: Timothy Kincaid

Timothy Kincaid — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 08:51:48 +0000

He is also a former trainee of Richard Cohen. Cohen presented a workshop in Northern Ireland in November of 2007 with Paul Miller as the contact person.

Can it be Christmas already?

By: Michael Bussee

Michael Bussee — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 14:35:37 +0000

Warren: I agree that " ex-gays are short sighted to avoid criticizing the comments..." Once again, they don't because they are afraid. Either that, or they agree. EXODUS? Care to comment? And not just on your personal blogs that will be overlooked or forgotten. I mean something official from all of the current board members of EXODUS. We (the founders of EXODUS) would have done it quickly and clearly -- and that was before EXODUS had access to computers.

By: Warren

Warren — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 14:22:53 +0000

@Peter Ould: While I understand the context of her comments, my reaction is that she could do so much good to turn the Christian church toward a compassionate center. Instead, it feels like she is pandering to the underbelly, rather than leading them toward a better way.
And I think the ex-gays are short sighted to avoid criticizing the comments about “her lovely psychiatrist.” Dr. Miller, for all of his medical training, still promotes the Mankind Project, and IHF.

By: Michael Bussee

Michael Bussee — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 14:22:17 +0000

Stephen Black of EXODUS should hold a rally for her and send her flowers or something. Anyone that doesn’t agree with her is probably a “hateful gay activist.”.
Warren said that “Christian sexual identity ministries should make their opposition to violence and harassment very clear.” They should, but they won’t. EXODUS still hasn’t. Where is the policy statement on their homepage?

By: Peter Ould

Peter Ould — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 12:45:45 +0000

I think that despite the obvious offence that Iris Robinson’s views offer and the clear fact that she was egregiously provocative in her comments, we forget the religious context in which she made the remarks. Northern Ireland is still a deeply religious society and she was speaking from her particular presbyterian protestant constituency.
In the UK at present there is a feeling that any form of criticism of homosexual activity is immediately stamped upon, so while I would join those who were caution her not only in her choice of language and styling of her argument but also her association with the techniques of Cohen, I would also ask us to reflect that she expresses an underbelly of resentment amongst many social conservatives in the UK at how their concerns and values are being sidelined and ignored.

By: Warren

Warren — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 13:58:50 +0000

Thanks for the typo catch, Evan
Evan – I think her motivation was religious. She has said repeatedly that she is reciting the Word of God. While as a Christian myself, I like the idea of public figures being free to express religious themes, I would prefer them focus on redemptive qualities of our common beliefs. Smacking at people seems to compromise her considerable potential inflence for good.

By: Mary

Mary — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 00:54:37 +0000

Evan,
I feel the same way. Let them voice their opinions. Keeping in mind – others will, too.

By: Evan

Evan — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 22:36:28 +0000

I don’t know the context that lead to her first comments, but I see nothing good coming out of this kind of messages. As long as we don’t understand the motivation behind this, which I suspect is not religious even if it’s worded in religious terms (she is a politician), we cannot hope to see people show some consideration before speaking publicly on this issue. I’m a supporter of giving people support in their struggle with SSAs, but I don’t support telling other people what to do with their lives.
Nevertheless, I think that silencing people who are of this opinion will not change much. It’s better if people respond to this message without stifling it, because others of the same opinion will grow angry and go underground (that can lead to a feeling of oppressed views and may be a stronger motivation for hate attacks). So it’s better to let people talk and address their views with arguments. It keeps people’s critical reflexes alive and it supports social learning.
PS. There is a small typo in the title, if it’s of any importance. ‘Controvery’ = controversy.